Cyclists pose far far far far far less danger to cars than the other way around. For that matter, they pose less danger to cars than other cars do. I don't deny that there are reckless cyclists on the road, but they are a small minority. And the worst damage they are likely to do to you is to scratch the paint on your SUV and make you drop your Big Mac in your lap when you hit them.
"Homes, schools, day care centers, and houses of worship"? This sounds like they've confused cell towers with liquor stores.
These kinds of distance-based restrictions are usually used as a way of banning something de facto when a higher law doesn't allow banning it de jure. Like a local law which bans past sex offenders from residing within 1000 feet of a school. Which has the (unintended?) side effect of preventing them from using the city's homeless shelters, all of which fall within that range.
In a joint statement, the chief executives of British Rail, Société Nationale des Chemins de Français, Deutsche Bahn, Österreichische Bundesbahnen, Ferrovie dello Stato, Nederlandse Spoorwegen, Schweizerische Bundesbahnen, Renfe Operadora, Norges Statsbaner, and several other European rail companies applauded the idea, saying it would help to increase competition in the market for European travel.
Did anyone actually think that having items (over)packaged individually, rush-shipped by plane, then delivered one at a time by a gasoline-powered truck, would have environmental benefits over shipping them in bulk to regional distribution centers where people would pick them up along with numerous other items at their convenience (i.e. bricks-n-mortar stores)? Unless you think that the book you order from 2000 miles away with two-day delivery is going to be brought to your door by the book fairy or a matter transporter, it's obviously not going to cut down on pollution!
I am a bit puzzled why someone assumed that opossums in an urban environment, surrounded by garbage (which tends to just sit there), would instead take the trouble to hunt rats (which generally do not).
The islands aren't going to be 100% underwater any time soon, so they aren't going to be nonexistent. They are well on their way to becoming uninhabitable, however, which happens well before the waves cover them up.
A nation-state doesn't have to have residents in a territory to continue claiming it. If they are able to annex and occupy land somewhere to maintain their status as a nation-state (I assume the UN requires that for recognition), and at least some of the islands of Kiribati remain partially above water (albeit uninhabitable and uninhabited), the I-Kirabati people could maintain legal and political control over those islands just as the US does with Howland Island or Norway does with Bouvet Island.
It's a question that establishes whether your assessment of the situation has any basis in reality, or it's simply a bunch of ignorant assumptions you just pulled out of the nearest orifice. Apparently it's the latter.
Someone who cared about islanders would suggest they actually solve their problems (in the event those problems actually happen) by building some small seawalls...
Are you the genius who suggested sunglasses and hats as the solution to ozone depletion?
It takes a little bit of insight and inductive thinking to figure out the connection (i.e. doing what good they can do while they can still do it) Something most/.ers are incapable of.
They know that their country is doomed. But before it dies, they still have sovereign control over their waters, so they're exercising it for the long-term good of the planet. Think of it as a nation-state's last will and testament, leaving a nature preserve for those that will survive it.
It makes perfect sense if you understand that when they speak of "our children and grandchildren", they're speaking as residents of Earth, not of Kiribati. They're taking a step toward conservation of the planet's biosphere (to the limited but measurable extent that they are able), and setting an example for others to follow, to help preserve it for future generations of humans, not just future generations of I-Kiribati.
The trademark minefield and the growing exhaustion of the domain namespace are both culprits. It's increasingly true that "all of the good ones are taken".
But still.... "Mageia"?
Auto makers have the same problem, and yet they still (usually) manage to invent brand names that consumers will find easy to remember and easy to pronounce. "Mageia" is not. (I just had to look up to confirm the spelling, not a good sign.) A combination of three vowels in a row is confusing: do you pronounce each one? blend them? which ones together? It isn't even clear what language it's derived from, which would at least give someone who knows languages a fair chance of guessing correctly.... I can sound out French or Portuguese or German or any of a few others, but this is going to be different depending on which one I try.
Excel and Powerpoint aren't great, but their main brand was Microsoft Office until they got brand recognition on their own.
Incorrect and backwards.
Excel and PowerPoint had both been successful stand-alone products for several years before "Microsoft Office" was conceived, as a bundle (with Word) of three popular, name-brand products at a lower total price. At the time, Excel had just overtaken 1-2-3 as the best-selling spreadsheet program, and this was an effort at coattails-style marketing synergy, as avid Word users would become Excel and PowerPoint users, Excel fans would switch to Word and Powerpoint, etc. What Microsoft would lose in revenue they'd gain in market share, a tactic that contributed to the decline of WordPerfect, Borland, and Lotus, and Microsoft's near-monopoly on commercial office suites.
This was around the same time that Microsoft started making "Microsoft" part of the official names of the applications, amalgamating its line of popular individual software products into a monolithic brand: not just "Microsoft's spreadsheet program, Excel" but "the spreadsheet program Microsoft Excel". This went further as "Microsoft Excel" became "Microsoft Office Excel". (And if not for the anti-vertical-integration court cases, I suspect it would be bundled as "Microsoft Office Windows Excel" by now.)
Well, I did undergrad twice at different colleges (once for CS, once for art), and I've worked for three colleges, most recently a stand-alone art school, so I can do some comparison.:) The art school I worked at had computers all over the place and now requires all students – including the paint-or-saw types – to own and use a laptop.
I'm not familiar with game development tools, so I can't make specific suggestions, but as someone who straddles technology and the visual arts, I'd suggest that the more visually-oriented they are, the better. Point and click and drag and drop. A troll suggested Flash, but that's actually not a bad idea: the similarity to the UI of Photoshop (which most fine-arts students these days have at least experienced) can help them get working with it, and the ability to start doing things with very little code is a good way to ease into more complex procedural programming. Most fine-artists are very good at processing information and ideas visually, so use that: flowcharts will be better then text, demonstrations are much better than lectures. If there's information that has to be presented verbally, give it to them in writing. On the other hand, don't be surprised if some of them turn out to be ace coders.
Don't assume that fine arts students today lack computer skills. Many do, and some just don't have the left-brains for it, but there are a lot of artists out there with an excellent understanding of computer technology. You can't get a BFA at most art schools these days without using a computer... sometimes a lot.
Slashdot Mirror
(I was trying to get people to fall for the rickroll.)
The external links at the end of the article do provide some interesting backup information, however.
Cyclists pose far far far far far less danger to cars than the other way around. For that matter, they pose less danger to cars than other cars do. I don't deny that there are reckless cyclists on the road, but they are a small minority. And the worst damage they are likely to do to you is to scratch the paint on your SUV and make you drop your Big Mac in your lap when you hit them.
Mom? Is that you? Because everyone else I know leaves their cell phone on all the time.
"Homes, schools, day care centers, and houses of worship"? This sounds like they've confused cell towers with liquor stores.
These kinds of distance-based restrictions are usually used as a way of banning something de facto when a higher law doesn't allow banning it de jure. Like a local law which bans past sex offenders from residing within 1000 feet of a school. Which has the (unintended?) side effect of preventing them from using the city's homeless shelters, all of which fall within that range.
With insight like that, you should start writing an advice column. And then stop before you publish any of it.
There's a difference between "finding someone that they desire" and "having someone that they desire".
Women often end up frustrated and disappointed just like men do.
You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about. None. Whatsoever.
So the ages-old mystery of how life began on Mars is finally solved!
In a joint statement, the chief executives of British Rail, Société Nationale des Chemins de Français, Deutsche Bahn, Österreichische Bundesbahnen, Ferrovie dello Stato, Nederlandse Spoorwegen, Schweizerische Bundesbahnen, Renfe Operadora, Norges Statsbaner, and several other European rail companies applauded the idea, saying it would help to increase competition in the market for European travel.
Did anyone actually think that having items (over)packaged individually, rush-shipped by plane, then delivered one at a time by a gasoline-powered truck, would have environmental benefits over shipping them in bulk to regional distribution centers where people would pick them up along with numerous other items at their convenience (i.e. bricks-n-mortar stores)? Unless you think that the book you order from 2000 miles away with two-day delivery is going to be brought to your door by the book fairy or a matter transporter, it's obviously not going to cut down on pollution!
I am a bit puzzled why someone assumed that opossums in an urban environment, surrounded by garbage (which tends to just sit there), would instead take the trouble to hunt rats (which generally do not).
How about the humans stay out of the wild where the animals already live?*
Sure, coons and possums are nuisances, but imagine how they feel about the humans who've moved into their neighborhood!
*Not referring to Brooklyn, obviously, but front porches in general.
The islands aren't going to be 100% underwater any time soon, so they aren't going to be nonexistent. They are well on their way to becoming uninhabitable, however, which happens well before the waves cover them up.
A nation-state doesn't have to have residents in a territory to continue claiming it. If they are able to annex and occupy land somewhere to maintain their status as a nation-state (I assume the UN requires that for recognition), and at least some of the islands of Kiribati remain partially above water (albeit uninhabitable and uninhabited), the I-Kirabati people could maintain legal and political control over those islands just as the US does with Howland Island or Norway does with Bouvet Island.
It's a question that establishes whether your assessment of the situation has any basis in reality, or it's simply a bunch of ignorant assumptions you just pulled out of the nearest orifice. Apparently it's the latter.
Are you the genius who suggested sunglasses and hats as the solution to ozone depletion?
It takes a little bit of insight and inductive thinking to figure out the connection (i.e. doing what good they can do while they can still do it) Something most /.ers are incapable of.
They know that their country is doomed. But before it dies, they still have sovereign control over their waters, so they're exercising it for the long-term good of the planet. Think of it as a nation-state's last will and testament, leaving a nature preserve for those that will survive it.
It makes perfect sense if you understand that when they speak of "our children and grandchildren", they're speaking as residents of Earth, not of Kiribati. They're taking a step toward conservation of the planet's biosphere (to the limited but measurable extent that they are able), and setting an example for others to follow, to help preserve it for future generations of humans, not just future generations of I-Kiribati.
The trademark minefield and the growing exhaustion of the domain namespace are both culprits. It's increasingly true that "all of the good ones are taken".
But still.... "Mageia"?
Auto makers have the same problem, and yet they still (usually) manage to invent brand names that consumers will find easy to remember and easy to pronounce. "Mageia" is not. (I just had to look up to confirm the spelling, not a good sign.) A combination of three vowels in a row is confusing: do you pronounce each one? blend them? which ones together? It isn't even clear what language it's derived from, which would at least give someone who knows languages a fair chance of guessing correctly.... I can sound out French or Portuguese or German or any of a few others, but this is going to be different depending on which one I try.
Incorrect and backwards.
Excel and PowerPoint had both been successful stand-alone products for several years before "Microsoft Office" was conceived, as a bundle (with Word) of three popular, name-brand products at a lower total price. At the time, Excel had just overtaken 1-2-3 as the best-selling spreadsheet program, and this was an effort at coattails-style marketing synergy, as avid Word users would become Excel and PowerPoint users, Excel fans would switch to Word and Powerpoint, etc. What Microsoft would lose in revenue they'd gain in market share, a tactic that contributed to the decline of WordPerfect, Borland, and Lotus, and Microsoft's near-monopoly on commercial office suites.
This was around the same time that Microsoft started making "Microsoft" part of the official names of the applications, amalgamating its line of popular individual software products into a monolithic brand: not just "Microsoft's spreadsheet program, Excel" but "the spreadsheet program Microsoft Excel". This went further as "Microsoft Excel" became "Microsoft Office Excel". (And if not for the anti-vertical-integration court cases, I suspect it would be bundled as "Microsoft Office Windows Excel" by now.)
Well, I did undergrad twice at different colleges (once for CS, once for art), and I've worked for three colleges, most recently a stand-alone art school, so I can do some comparison. :) The art school I worked at had computers all over the place and now requires all students – including the paint-or-saw types – to own and use a laptop.
I'm not familiar with game development tools, so I can't make specific suggestions, but as someone who straddles technology and the visual arts, I'd suggest that the more visually-oriented they are, the better. Point and click and drag and drop. A troll suggested Flash, but that's actually not a bad idea: the similarity to the UI of Photoshop (which most fine-arts students these days have at least experienced) can help them get working with it, and the ability to start doing things with very little code is a good way to ease into more complex procedural programming. Most fine-artists are very good at processing information and ideas visually, so use that: flowcharts will be better then text, demonstrations are much better than lectures. If there's information that has to be presented verbally, give it to them in writing. On the other hand, don't be surprised if some of them turn out to be ace coders.
Don't assume that fine arts students today lack computer skills. Many do, and some just don't have the left-brains for it, but there are a lot of artists out there with an excellent understanding of computer technology. You can't get a BFA at most art schools these days without using a computer... sometimes a lot.